Re: [Xen-devel] xen-unstable, winxp32 very poor performance on AMD FX-8150, I bisected and changeset is 24770:7f79475d3de7

[Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>]

Hello,

George: What do you think, should we add this bug to the Xen 4.3 status email 
for tracking it? 
It's a serious HVM/winxp performance regression on AMD..

-- Pasi

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 04:25:47PM +0100, Peter Maloney wrote:
> On 11/22/2012 07:54 PM, Peter Maloney wrote:
> > On 11/13/2012 02:17 PM, Peter Maloney wrote:
> >> On 2012-11-01 18:28, Andres Lagar-Cavilla wrote:
> >>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> At 14:59 +0100 on 22 Oct (1350917960), Tim Deegan wrote:
> >>>>> At 19:21 +0200 on 20 Oct (1350760876), Peter Maloney wrote:
> >>>>>> The change was 8 months ago
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> changeset:   24770:7f79475d3de7
> >>>>>> user:        Andres Lagar-Cavilla <andres@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> date:        Fri Feb 10 16:07:07 2012 +0000
> >>>>>> summary:     x86/mm: Make p2m lookups fully synchronized wrt 
> >>>>>> modifications
> >>>> [...]
> >>> Not any immediate ideas without profiling.
> >>>
> >>> However, most callers of hvmemul_do_io pass a stub zero ram_gpa address. 
> >>> We might be madly hitting the p2m locks for no reason there.
> >>>
> >>> How about the following patch, Peter, Tim?
> > I tried the patch applied to xen-unstable 4.2.0-branched
> > 528f0708b6db+ 4.2.0-branched
> >
> > It seemed the same. It was extremely slow with 7 vcpus, and with 2 vcpus
> > it was slow, but fast enough that I could bother to log in and out
> > during the test.
> >
> > Attached are logs generated with this command (using xm instead of xl):
> > for i in {1..30}; do xm debug-keys d; xm dmesg -c; done >> nameoflog
> >
> > xenxp_xm_dmesg_-c_7cpus_idle.log
> > xenxp_xm_dmesg_-c_7cpus_logintooslow.log
> > xenxp_xm_dmesg_-c_7cpus_shutdown.log
> > xenxp_xm_dmesg_-c_duringlogin.log
> > xenxp_xm_dmesg_-c_idling_login_screen.log
> >
> > Also there is xenxp_dmesg.log which is output from hitting alt+sysrq+w
> > and p in case it's relevant.
> >
> > BTW this time I am testing with kernel 3.6.7
> >
> 
> I also tested 4.2.1 now, and it has the same problem. And after using it
> for a while with windows 8 (playing games), I get the general feel that
> it is laggier than with 4.1.3. And now I'm using 4.1.4 which is fast
> like 4.1.3.
> 
> So any ideas on how to fix this or gather more useful information?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel